No. 520.
Mr. White
to Mr. Bayard.
Legation of
the United States,
London, May 11, 1888.
(Received May 22.)
No. 749.]
Sir: I have the honor to inclose herewith two
extracts from the Times of the 8th instant and of to-day, containing reports
of questions asked in the House of Commons with reference to Samoan affairs,
and of the answers given thereto by Sir James Fergusson, under secretary of
state for foreign affairs.
I have, etc.,
[lnclosure 1 in No. 749.—The London Times,
Tuesday, May 8, 1888.]
Samoa.
Mr. W. McArthur asked the under-secretary of
state for foreign affairs whether the agreements of 1879 and 1883
between Great Britain, Germany, the United States, and Samoa were all
signed by Malietoa as King of Samoa; whether the Government had ever had
any reason to complain of the non-fulfillment by Malietoa of any part of
those agreements; whether the attention of the Government had been
called to a proclamation issued to the Samoans on the 25th of August,
1887, and signed by the British pro-consul, Mr. H. Wilson, in which
occurred these words: “Now, therefore, we, the undersigned
representatives of the United States of America and Great Britain,
hereby give notice that we and our Governments do not and never have
recognized Tamasese as King of Samoa, but continue as heretofore to
recognize Malietoa;” whether the consent of the British and United
States Governments was asked for by Germany prior to the seizure and
deportation of Malietoa by a German ship-of-war; whether the Government
proposed to acquiesce in the action of Germany; whether they knew that a
large majority of the Samoan people were in favor of Malietoa as against
Tamasese; whether Malietoa had repeatedly wished to take measures with
regard to Tamasese, but had been restrained by the repeated assurances
of the English
[Page 717]
consul that if
peace were kept in the island the influence of England should always be
used to preserve Malietoa’s right to the throne; whether the British
Government had ceased to recognize Malietoa as King of Samoa; if so,
when and why; and whether the Government regarded the convention as
being: still in force as between Great Britain, the United States, and
Samoa.
Sir J. Fergusson. The first, second, and fourth
questions of the honorable gentleman must be answered in the negative.
Her Majesty’s Government have seen no cause to take part on either side
in the differences between King Malietoa and the Emperor of Germany. At
present, Tamasese is the King de facto, and will
be recognized as such in practice by Her Majesty’s Government according
to the ordinary rules. No change has taken place in the treaty relations
between England, Germany, and the United States in regard to Samoa.
Mr. W. McArthur. Do I understand the right
honorable gentleman to say Her Majesty’s Government have no information
as to paragraph 4?
Sir J. Fergusson. Her Majesty’s Government have
not been consulted on the matter by the Government of Germany.
Mr. W. McArthur. Does Her Majesty’s Government
propose to disavow the action of their agent? [Hear, hear.]
Sir J. Fergusson. Owing to the delay in the
telegraph, our agent took action on his own responsibility and without
communication from us.
[Inclosure 2 in No. 749.—The London Times,
Friday, May 11, 1888.]
Samoa.
Mr. W. McArthur asked the under-secretary of
state for foreign affairs whether he would give the date on which the
English Government agreed to sanction the abandonment by Germany of the
convention respecting Samoa.
Sir J. Fergusson. No formal agreement has been
entered into for the abrogation of the convention of 1879 respecting the
municipal board of Apia, but as the continuance of that board had become
impracticable, orders were, on the 24th of February, sent to the acting
British consul to consider the convention as suspended. The district has
accordingly passed under the control of the de
facto Samoan Government, as provided by article 10 of the
convention in case of its termination.
In reply to further questions from Mr. W. McArthur, Sir J. Fergusson
said: “In the reply which I gave on May 3, the date which I mentioned
refers to the present year. I then stated accurately that the German
Government had informed Her Majesty’s Government that it was their
intention to demand reparation from Malietoa, which, of course, might
involve farther proceedings. The telegram informing the British consul
was delayed because no vessel was immediately available to forward it
from New Zealand, and the consul, in the absence of instructions, acted
on his own responsibility.”
Mr. McArthur. Are we to understand that the
German Government gave such short notice that there was no time for
inquiry? [Hear, hear.]
Sir J. Fergusson. We are now coming to a
different and complicated matter, and I ought to have notice of the
question. [Hear, hear.]
Mr. Conybeare Will the right honorable
gentleman lay a return upon the table showing the grounds upon which
consuls can act without instructions from their superiors?
Sir J. Fergusson; There can be no possible
reason why notice of a question of that kind should not be given. [Hear,
hear.]
